What is Digg?225 Comments
- Ferre1, on 03/17/2009, -56/+119Someone should pre-emtive strike Israel, rumour has it that they have illegal nuclear weapons.
- newtsd, on 03/17/2009, -6/+55Nice headline, I "could" crap my pants, but I have no immediate plans to crap said pants.
- wrenchone, on 03/17/2009, -7/+48Um ok, so what?
Report: Country may use weapons it has against another country.
You could just as easily issue a report saying they could throw rocks at them. - inactive, on 03/17/2009, -15/+52If Isreal attacks Iran, they are on their ***** own. No Americans troops should help bail their asses out if they start it.
- serif69, on 03/17/2009, -3/+35So these Washington think-tanks sit around and think of what Israel could potentially do if a certain set of circumstances are met, and it's somehow news?
- Liam76, on 03/17/2009, -7/+34I tis only illegal if you signed a treaty saying you wouldn't make them, them and allow inspections, then refuse to follow the treaty.
- kingmanic, on 03/17/2009, -1/+26"If Isreal attacks Iran, they are on their ***** own."
That has always been true. Israel doesn't enlist US troops to defend themselves. They just use US money to cover the cost. - lemur, on 03/17/2009, -13/+34It's only illegal if the United States says so.
- sodade, on 03/17/2009, -13/+32Killing for peace is like ***** for chastity. ***** dumbasses.
- Frosty122, on 03/17/2009, -14/+33Jesus, the Iranian government may be crap, but you are saying the whole country and it's citizens should be bombed? It's sad people get so mad when people say that crap about America, but get dugg way up when they say it about Iran. Citizens shouldn't have to pay for their crappy governments misdeeds! God damn hypocrite.
- bhank21, on 03/17/2009, -8/+27key word there is should. but you know we will. with a congress that's half jewish and the other half sucking the aipac dick, of course we'll step in. sadly, for the wrong side.
- TheUngod, on 03/17/2009, -1/+18How is the parent of this getting dugg up for saying "bomb Israel?" Is digg on crack today? I thought bombing ANYONE was a bad thing.
- dalittle, on 03/17/2009, -20/+36Or israel could act with some sense and reason and allow the UN to dismantle their nuclear arsenal and the UN to patrol the Gaza and West Bank Borders.
- inactive, on 03/17/2009, -8/+23Haha... For a minute there I thought you were serious.
Good one! - casemon, on 03/17/2009, -29/+42Idiots... Iran doesn't "start" wars, but when they defend themselves, it's going to be WW3...
Way to go Israeli *****. - prasantc, on 03/17/2009, -5/+18There are thousands of jews in Iran who live in peace with the muslims. Threats like this do further harm to any hope for long term peace.
Condition of jews in Iran - http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/23/opinion/23cohen. ... - Remelox, on 03/17/2009, -10/+22I know, why don't I call myself a think tank and talk about all the things Israel could do and see how many headlines I can get.
"Israel could start raping all of Iran's goats."
"Israel could pour all of their nuclear waste into Iran's water supply."
"Israel could also decide to wipe out all of their neighbors in order to finally get some breathing room."
Man, Israel is freakin' evil. - sgnpkd, on 03/17/2009, -15/+27Go dig your own grave.
- inactive, on 03/17/2009, -7/+19You know what the problem with Israel haters is, they try to tie EVERYTHING together to the Palestinian question to discredit everything Israel does.
Iran has nukes, hates Israel? Oh its because Israel is occupying Gaza and West Bank. Seriously this ***** gets old. - Hollow5, on 03/17/2009, -0/+11Well said, websites and news papers will make a headline out of just about anything these days.
- pukiman, on 03/17/2009, -0/+11They might, and they might not. Now what?
- Oogler, on 03/17/2009, -0/+9Well duh. It took a think tank to come up with this???
- inactive, on 03/17/2009, -4/+12And alot of Arabs live peacefully in Israel yet Arab media depict the Jews as Muslim haters.
- m0llusk, on 03/17/2009, -0/+8North Korea is a militarist dictatorship with no tolerance for any kind of dissidence. Israel is a complex and noisy democracy with frequent demonstrations and an organized crime problem. Two states could hardly be further apart.
- calcm, on 03/17/2009, -0/+8I really get burned out on these speculation articles that do nothing but make people either fearful or angry. What is the point? It is all just a big guess. for like the past year there have been lots of articles on digg that basically claimed Israel was going to strike within the next week and of course nothing happened.
- Christ0s, on 03/17/2009, -5/+13Sadly In international relations there is only one law: might makes right. which is why everyone should have nuclear weapons the fear of attack is the only protection from other countries.
- inactive, on 03/17/2009, -9/+17You might want to read past the Digg Headline, dude.
- inactive, on 03/17/2009, -0/+8Israel is not dragging us into WW3, it is countries like Iran which have no connection at all to the Palestinian people using the Israel issue as a tool to further their own territorial and regional conquests.
- Phaedryn, on 03/17/2009, -7/+15Your factual statement is not going to knock his outrage off that high horse, unfortunately...
- LongShlong, on 03/17/2009, -3/+11Can I crap them for you?
- as566, on 03/17/2009, -2/+10Doesn't Israel have the 6th largest army in the world with a lot of high-tech weaponry. Why would Israel not be able to win a war with Iran?
- weeFred, on 03/17/2009, -7/+15They get Hezbollah and Hamas to do it for them, then they claim ignorance.
- pukiman, on 03/17/2009, -0/+8Because Iran got Photoshop, with a valid license. Duh.
- Hollow5, on 03/17/2009, -0/+8I'd be more interested about knowing how a thinking tank is made possible.
- burndive, on 03/17/2009, -1/+8In other news: duh!
How is this not blatantly obvious? - as566, on 03/17/2009, -8/+14Frosty,
It seems that the article says that Israel would use precision strikes to knock out nuclear facilities, while Iran would fire upon Israel without any specific target, meaning probably hitting civilians that don't even live near military facilities. - inactive, on 03/17/2009, -8/+13warmonger much?
- neko6, on 03/17/2009, -0/+5That was Iraq's nuclear facilities. Iran learned the lesson from that operation and are keeping their facilities in bunkers (which makes one wonder why, if they're really for 'power only' as they claim...)
- weeFred, on 03/17/2009, -0/+5In 2003 Iraq put up about 3 weeks of resistance, the Iran-Iraq war ended with a ceasefire after a stalemate in which neither side won.
- casek, on 03/17/2009, -1/+6why did you get dug down? looks like the truth from a jewish writer, nonetheless.
diggers are strange. - inactive, on 03/17/2009, -2/+7Just like the entire planet has rushed in to save the Palestinians? Please.
- SeaSideClown, on 03/17/2009, -2/+7god i hope your joking...
- JustLetGo, on 03/17/2009, -9/+14Preemptive = Aggressor.
- blakeage, on 03/17/2009, -0/+5They could attack with knives and forks for all I care
- kingmanic, on 03/17/2009, -1/+6I doubt you'd get a unanimous condemnation. Maybe all the countries who have no vested interest most of the Muslim world. Many would like to see a Israel Iran war as both are thorns int he sides of their neighbors.
- as566, on 03/17/2009, -0/+5Jlaugh,
That sounds like another Six-Day War. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War) All its neighbors with support from other countries, all against Israel, and Israel still held its own.
Iran being a mountainous country would hinder ground forces but not air forces. It would help Iran but not all that much. - spongya77, on 03/17/2009, -4/+9You ARE and *****, mister... Very fitting name
- as566, on 03/17/2009, -1/+5lol wut?
The article says that Israel would strike Iran's nuclear facilities. No nuclear facilities = no strike on nuclear facilities.
AFAIK Israel hasn't shown hostility towards England.
Also, aren't Christians & Jews "beasts that walk on two legs" to Muslims, and Muslims & Jews "beasts that walk on two legs" to Christians as well? - tehxen3, on 03/19/2009, -0/+4Go ahead, rumor is that Israel doesn't lose wars that often. Or at all for that matter.
- monkeyrun, on 03/17/2009, -6/+10Now should Iran do a "pre-pre-emptive attack" on Israel?
The very logic of "pre-emptive attack" is flawed. -
Show 51 - 100 of 225 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is